fg_admin
Forum Replies Created
-
P.S.
Within hours of the plane crash, the FBI had the above website taken offline to protect the unlawful activities of the government that it exposes.
SCUM BAGS!
-
Here is the CNN story associated with the above:
http://www.cnn.com/2…dex.html?hpt=T1
_______________
Latest updates: Plane crashes into building in Austin, Texas
(CNN) — The latest news as it comes in to CNN from the scene of the crash of a small plane in Austin, Texas. (All times are ET, one hour ahead of local Austin time.)
1:47 p.m.: A message on a Web site registered to Joseph Andrew Stack appears to be a suicide note: “If you're reading this, you're no doubt asking yourself, 'Why did this have to happen?'” the message says. “The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time.” In the long message, the writer rails against the government and, particularly, the Internal Revenue Service.
1:43 p.m. A federal law enforcement official confirmed Stack's name and said he owned a house that was burned Thursday. Asked whether Stack set the fire, the official replied, “It appears that way.”
1:40 p.m. The official said the plane was a Piper and that officials believe Stack owned it. Initially there was confusion that the plane was stolen, but the official said that officials no longer believe that is true. Asked whether it was suicide, the official said “it looks like it.”
Are you there? Share your photos, video, stories with CNN
1:19 p.m.: FAA officials tell CNN the plane was a Piper Cherokee PA-28. Earlier reports of the plane's make were incorrect.
1:18 p.m.: A federal law enforcement official told CNN that they believed the plane belonged to Stack.
- cnnRelatedTopicKeys.push('Austin_Texas'); Austin (Texas)[*] cnnRelatedTopicKeys.push('Accidents_and_Disasters'); Accidents and Disasters
1:03 p.m.: Department of Homeland security spokesman Matt Chandler revises an earlier statement, saying there is “no reason to believe there is a nexus to terrorist activity.” He had said there was, as of that time, no indication of criminal activity, either.
12:49 p.m.: The Internal Revenue Service in Dallas, Texas, told CNN that the building is a federal IRS outsourced building. It said 199 of its employees work there. The IRS said it thinks all employees are accounted for, but they are checking.
12:40 p.m.: Federal officials said two F-16 fighter jets were launched as a precaution after the crash, though terrorist intent was not indicated.
12:32 p.m.: The FAA said the plane departed Georgetown Municipal Airport, north of Austin, about 9:40 a.m., and that the pilot did not file a flight plan.
12:18 p.m.: Witnesses described an infernal scene that shook nearby buildings and sent fire and smoke bellowing into the sky. “I just saw smoke and flames,” said CNN iReporter Mike Ernest. “I could not believe what I was seeing. It was just smoke and flames everywhere.”
12:11 p.m.: Harry Evans of the Austin Fire Department said firefighters found “heavy fire destruction in and around the second floor … lots of heat, lots of smoke, lots of fire.”
12:05 p.m.: Two people were transported from the crash site to University Medical Center Brackenridge, said hospital spokeswoman Matilda Sanchez. She could not provide additional information. University Medical Center Brackenridge is the only Level 1 trauma center for adults in Austin.
12:03 p.m.: Cynthia Reed, who works in the building next to the one hit, told CNN she saw people who apparently were trapped. “They were hanging out the windows, screaming for help,” she said.
11:44 a.m.: Firefighters used two ladder trucks and other equipment to hose down the blaze at the building, which police said was located in the 9400 block of Research Boulevard. Traffic on Southbound U.S. 183, which is adjacent to the crash site, started to snarl as black smoke poured out of the seven-story building.
11:36 a.m.: A small airplane crashed into a building in Austin, Texas, Thursday morning, according to Lynn Lundsford of the Federal Aviation Administration.
-
Saint Dundee,
Welcome to our forums.
Please don't EVER advocate the UCC insanity you were introduced to in prison in these forums. You will DEFINITELY go back there if you follow that path. Your grammar and spelling betray that your own ignorance makes you an attractive target for con artists, which may be the way you ended up in jail to begin with. We had to edit your post to fix all the many problems.
Stick ONLY with what you can prove, and OTHER can prove WITH legally admissible evidence from law or court rulings. Since the people you heard from couldn't back up what they were saying with evidence, then they were con artists imitating the governments approach at creating a commercial religion.
Instead:
1. Read the following document proving the UCC redemption approach is flawed and false and gets people like you in jail:
Policy Document: UCC Redemption, Form #08.002
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…icyDocs/UCC.pdf
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
2. Follow the following document and GET EDUCATED so you don't make such an attractive future target for shysters:
Path to Freedom, Form #09.015
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…thToFreedom.pdf
The above document is at the top of our opening page, the Taxation Page, and the Sovereignty page and is MANDATORY for all those using materials off this website to interact with anyone in the legal profession, government, or courts.
-
Neo,
Now thanks for sharing that conundrum. Before your question can be fully addressed, the CONTEXT in which the statutes are used is important. You didn't provide the state of the Union and the SPECIFIC statutory reference and link for us all to look at. I don't believe you would be compromising your privacy to divulge it, because a state is a BIG place.
Until we have an entire context, specific state, and statutory reference, and a link to the statute to look at, I think it would be presumptuous to tackle this problem. For future reference, I wouldn't advise using the word “my” so as to implicate yourself and to avoid backing yourself into the corner you may feel you are in now because of your lead post. Try to keep things more impersonal, so we can objectify the discussion.
At first glance, the definition betrays that a contract is at issue, and as you probably well know, it is a maxim of law that debt and contract know no place.
Quote:Debitum et contractus non sunt nullius loci.
Debt and contract [franchise agreement, in this case] are of no particular place.
Locus contractus regit actum.
The place of the contract [franchise agreement, in this case] governs the act.
[Bouvier's Maxims of Law, 1856;SOURCE: [url url=”http://famguardian.o…iersmaxims.htm/”]http://famguardian.o…iersMaxims.htm][/url]
Hence, they can define it any way they want because you volunteered for it. There can be no statutory violation of due process in an overly broad definition for something you volunteered for.
Quote:Volunti non fit injuria.He who consents cannot receive an injury. 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 2279, 2327; 4 T. R. 657; Shelf. on mar. & Div. 449.
Consensus tollit errorem.
Consent removes or obviates a mistake. Co. Litt. 126.
Melius est omnia mala pati quam malo concentire.
It is better to suffer every wrong or ill, than to consent to it. 3 Co. Inst. 23.
Nemo videtur fraudare eos qui sciunt, et consentiunt.
One cannot complain of having been deceived when he knew the fact and gave his consent. Dig. 50, 17, 145.
[Bouvier's Maxims of Law, 1856;
SOURCE: http://famguardian.o…viersMaxims.htm]
All franchises are contracts and a license for ANYTHING is a franchise. The point is, you can't accept state property, which is what a license is, and all the rights that attach to it, without becoming a public officer. That, in fact, is what it means to BE a public officer, if you look at the definition in the legal dictionary: Someone in charge of state property. Its a contradiction to assume that you can accept anything of value including a license, and not waive sovereign immunity. ALL contracts convey rights, and all franchises are contracts. You want your cake without paying for it.
The only rational defense is to ensure that one applies as a nonresident and puts on the application that they waive and all right to any benefit or consideration that might attach to the application process, reserve all rights, and are PROHIBITED by the Declaration of Independence from “alienating” any of your natural rights. Therefore, organic law PROHIBITS conveying any rights to the government and therefore the right to treat you, the applicant, as a public officer.
-
EDITORIAL: From a friend. We didn't write this and don't claim to agree with their views.
_____________
JURY FINDS THE KILLER OF TILLER THE KILLER GUILTY!!Hero or VillainMSNBC, January 29, 2010 WICHITA, Kan. – A man who said he killed prominent Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller in order to save the lives of unborn children was convicted Friday of murder. The jury deliberated for just 37 minutes before finding Scott Roeder, 51, of Kansas City, Mo., guilty of premeditated, first-degree murder in the May 31 shooting death. Defense attorney Mark Rudy described his case as helpless and hopeless.
WARNING: Please don't read this if you don't like your views challenged.
Did you see the movie Valkyrie honoring the men who tried to execute Hitler? America may have a like hero of its own.
The face of a mass murderer.The Baby Butcher from Kansas—Tier the KillerLet me see if I have this straight. Scott Roeder the 51 year old man who executed Killer the Tiller, the baby butcher from Kansas, in order to save innocent babies was found guilty of murder. Christian leader after Christian leader has come out and condemned Roeder. One website said, “Make no mistake about it, Roeder did the work of the Devil?”
Well, if Killer the Tiller did the work of the Devil and Roeder did the work of the Devil, whose side is the Devil on? Didn't Jesus say, “A house divided against itself cannot stand?” Has anyone thought that God may have raised up Roeder to execute this Nazi-like baby killer?
Now I know this view tastes like fish-flavored ice cream, but please read on.
While having coffee with some Christians, the execution of Tiller the Killer came up. I sat silent for a while. Someone asked the question, “What would you do if you were on the jury?” All emphatically agreed that Roeder committed murder and should be sentenced to life in prison (or death). I interjected, “I would have exonerated him on the basis that our laws our perverted and the government failed to do its duty toward Tiller the Killer. Roeder did what the government did not have the will and courage to do; that is, arrest Tiller the Killer, charge him with mass murder, an give him the death penalty.” Suddenly, frowns like farm furrows arose on the brow of the group. Breath turned foul, and I was about as popular as an Arab in a synagogue.
So I asked, “Are any of you familiar with the doctrine of intervention?” None were. So, I asked, “Was the execution of Agag by Samuel the prophet murder in I Samuel 15?” None of the Christians in the discussion seemed to be familiar with the story. Well, iSamuel would have been arrested and found guilty in our perverse American court. They sat silent with gloom written all over their faces. I rehearsed the story of how God ordered King Saul to execute the Amalekites who were guilty of murdering hundreds of innocent Israelites. But, Saul rejected God's command in favor of his own law-order sparing the life of the Amalekite butcher. Because Saul neglected his duty to execute the butcher, Samuel the prophet took a sword and debowled Awful Agag. The group seemed non-plused.
I went on to explain the DOCTRINE OF INTERVENTION; that is, that it is the duty of spiritual authorities to confront civil authorities for their tacit dereliction of duties and if necessary assume temporarily responsibilities of the office of the civil ruler in order to carry out God's will. Elijah was called to intervene when King Ahab permitted the execution of Naboth (I Kings 21). God raised up a prophet to confront Jeroboam for his idolatrous practices (I Kings 13). David assumed the role of an executioner as a general in Israel's army when the professed killer of Saul made his announcement (2 Samuel 1). Finally, someone in the group groaned, “Interesting” and the subject swiftly changed.
What is a Christian suppose to do when the government he is suppose to respect disobeys the laws of God and refuses to do its duty to arrest and execute baby killers? What are citizens to do when the laws of man oppose to the laws of God?
Well, I'll tell you this: Most Christians quietly neglect the law of God and vigorously embrace the godless laws of our humanistic state. I'm not telling you to go out and execute an abortionist, but I, for one, certainly have a difficult time condemning Roeder for doing what the government should have done . . . and that is, to arrest Tiller, try him, and execute the SOB (excuse the French)? The essence of the demand for abortion is to return to pagan statism, the Philistine ethos of Plato, the perverted Greek humanist. The Sixth Commandment, “Thou shall not kill” not only forbids negative acts like negligent homicide and premeditated murder, it demands a positive vigorous application of the death penalty to those who take life and foster a culture of death—like Killer the Tiller, et.al.
God's law is not a private matter demanding something from the Christian but leaving other men to do as they please. The law is valid for the Christian because it is valid for all. God's law is not only right for me, but for all men, and all of man's institutions.
The Movie Valkyrie starring Tom Cruise who played Claus Schenk von Stauffenberg, an army officer in Hitler's army who believed in the DOCTRINE OF INTERVENTION, revealed that the only men who were truly honored after WWII by the German people were the three men who attempted to assassinate Hitler the Killer! Do you think that one day America will awaken to Biblical truth and honor Scot Roeder as a hero for doing what those in position of civil authority did not have the righteousness to do—to arrest, try and execute Tiller the Killer?
Dr. Brook S. 2.16.2010
Designated a Christian Terrorist by Fema July, 2009 along with the Founding Fathers, Christians, and Homeschoolers.
-
Here was the response sent back to Scambos' response in the previous post.
____________________
Mr. Tom Scambos,
Thank you for removing the offending materials.
As far as our position on the nonresident alien, we are quite open to changing it if:
1. Legally admissible evidence that is it incorrect can be provided by you.
2. You rebut the errors in the following document and answer the questions at the end in such a way that you don't contradict yourself.
Why you are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not statutory Citizen, Form #05.006
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…hyANational.pdf
3. You rebut the errors in the following document and answer the questions at the end in such a way that you don't contradict yourself.
Nonresident Alien Position, Form #05.020
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Form…ienPosition.pdf
The reason we post the above materials is to invite them to be corrected. After 8 years of publishing this information and 240,000 visitors a month during much of that time, NO ONE, including you, has ever presented legally admissible evidence they are wrong. Calling them “frivolous” doesn't mean anything either and evades the presentation of evidence to back up your false presumptions.
http://sedm.org/Form…Presumption.pdf
Since you haven't corrected them, and probably won't correct them, then most judges would refer to your position as simply “frivolous”, unsupported by evidence, and “presumptuous” and therefore meriting sanctions.
After an 8 year rampage by the IRS against freedom websites including yours beginning in 2001, we are among the few left standing. Our materials have been extensively reviewed during an injunction proceeding and neither the court nor the U.S. attorney could find EVEN ONE THING wrong with what is currently posted. No one argues with us except those who have flawed positions and therefore become targets on the Quatloos.com website. You will note that you, Mr. Scambos, are on the TP status board at Quatloos because of your flawed views, and yet they removed us from the status board years ago because we don't make unsupported or flawed arguments.
You will be shut down for the same reason that Save a Patriot was shut down: Because you think you have a domicile in the “United States” and don't understand the distinctions between the statutory and the constitutional “United States” in the context of citizenship. That is why we don't want any of our materials associated with yours or posted on your website.
If we don't hear from you, we are permitted by law to presume you agree with the above and admit you are incorrect pursuant to federal rule of civil procedure 8(b)(6), which says a failure to deny constitutes an admission of the truth of anything said or proposed.
The least you could do is make your mailing address representative of your true location. You are not in Arlington, VA, but Sunnyvale, according to other information available.
-
Here was the response of Mr. Scambos to a copyright violation notice sent to him related to the lead post:
_________________________________
From: Thomas Freed [freed_thomas@yahoo.com]
All of the internal document links back to your web site were preserved in that page, so I was refering people to your web site, but if you don't want the referrals, that's fine. I have removed it as requested.
You need to stop telling people that they are non-resident aliens. It is wrong
Tom Freed
-
EDITORIAL: Another Update on Sam Kennedy's Activities, posted as received via email. We didn't write this.
_______________
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Across the country, people are literally being moved to tears by The Restore America Plan (RAP) upon examining the complete 79 page Declaration document at local meetings around the country. One party mentioned it was like attending the early screenings of the movie “Rocky,” where people stood and cheered. Another said it was the greatest event of her life other than marriage and the birth of her children. Even seasoned patriots report being energized as the actual strategy unfolded page by page for ending foreclosure, bank collections, tax prosecutions, foreign taxation, bogus criminal cases and travel issues within the first thirty days. People with ongoing foreclosures and prosecutions are especially moved. It's an emotional moment when you suddenly realize that the remedy you have been dreaming about for years is at hand, and the People's suffering, not just their own but the misery of countless neighbors, friends and family, is about to end by our own efforts. It's a breathtaking moment.
Here are some typical comments:
– “Finally an end in sight. Praise the Lord.”
– “I really thought I would spend the rest of my life in prison. Thank God I can have a hand in ending this travesty.”
– “We've been fighting Godzilla with toothpicks until this came along. I want in.”
– “I thought it would be just another patriot web site and promises. I WAS WRONG!”
– “I see I have to challenge my own rhetoric…do I want a remedy for me and my family now or do I want to stand on my sovereignty till they kill me? Not a hard decision.”
– “Patriots UNITE! Get down off your high horses and join the march to freedom!”
– “Personally, I would love a Biblical paradise but I guess my little homestead won't help my neighbors and probably won't deter the sheriff. So bring on the Republic!”
– “I've been told I'm a king. I guess I forgot who the real King is. I'm honored to work with people across the country and get back to the business of living.”
Folks, we have hundreds of such comments. I invite everyone to meet with your state coordinators when they contact you. Chances are, if you keep an open mind, you are likely to experience a similar epiphany.
During development, we had three primary questions:
1. How much longer could we postpone a remedy? How many more patriots would be sent to prison while we are guided to World War III?
2. How could we achieve relief for ALL Americans and not just the enlightened few?
3. Should we move ahead using all of our knowledge and inside information or enter a nationwide negotiation over the coming months and years?
The answer to the first question was Yesterday! The suffering must end NOW. Not in 2012 or 2020.
The answer to the second question was that any remedy which addressed only OUR problems was DEAD ON ARRIVAL. We could not abandon the meek or retire to our own little homesteads as “kings” of a few square yards of dirt. We couldn't even imagine such selfishness.
The answer to the third question was dictated by events. AS WE HAVE BEEN TOLD BY INSIDE SOURCES THAT MARCH 31 IS THE DEADLINE, any delay is likely to be FATAL TO THE REMEDY. Our goal is to relieve the suffering rather than prove our own rhetoric. So we accepted our roles as bond servants to the Messiah rather than earthly kings on county land, and prayed to the Lord for wisdom as we marched forward.
Folks, we are gratified at the response because THE ONLY THING THAT CAN STOP THE REPUBLICS IS IF YOU COWER IN FEAR, INDECISION OR PATRIOT DOGMA. Frankly, we are happy to use the corporations' delusions as an INTERIM vehicle to relieve the suffering and rescind the corporation itself. Please keep in mind that the military doesn't give a hoot about county grand juries. WHY DO YOU THINK THE PROVOST HAS BEEN IGNORING YOUR ORDERS FOR YEARS? That's just the way it is. But they WILL follow the orders of the De jure Grand Juries as constructed under the Restore America Plan, since they very much understand the law venue represented by the state republics. It's ingrained in their programming. That's just one of many ways in which the Plan uses the corporations' delusions to achieve its goals.
Finally, I personally wish to commend Tim Turner for the courage of his devotion to bringing forth a remedy for all of the sovereign People. Tim's dedication to the millions of suffering Americans rather than just a few, demonstrates his character and devotion. He is a genuine American hero, and I understand why so many have placed their confidence in him.
Folks, this is an exciting time. To see the fruits of our labors materialize in this great awakening across the land is uniquely gratifying.
__________________
Here are links to the February 7, 2010 broadcast of TAKE NO PRISONERS:
http://republicbroadcasting.org (archives)
http://www.statusisfreedom.com/ (right side of page)
During the first 15 minutes, I explain why YOU DO NOT NEED TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION OTHER THAN voicing your willingness to join the Guardians of the Free Republics by email and at our web sight ( http://www.guardiansofthefreerepublics.com). Again, I apologize for our inability to answer each communication individually, however take heart that we are organizing the remedy as we speak. And that remedy, by its global nature, will be available to EVERY sovereign man and woman. NO ONE will be left behind.
__________________
TOMORROW NIGHT (SUNDAY) ON TAKE NO PRISONERS, THE GUARDIAN ELDERS WILL BE JOINED BY A SPECIAL GUEST WHO WILL TELL YOU OF HIS MEETING WITH HIGH RANKING MILITARY OFFICIALS ON BEHALF OF FREEDOM AND DE JURE GOVERNANCE. YOU DO NOT WANT TO MISS THIS BROADCAST.
That's this Sunday night, February 14, 2010, on TAKE NO PRISONERS at the Republic Broadcasting Network. TAKE NO PRISONERS can be heard on FM and shortwave stations around the world, and on the Internet via Shout cast or directly through the network website at:
http://republicbroadcasting.org
On behalf of the Guardian Elders, thank you for reading and would you please CIRCULATE THIS EMAIL FAR AND WIDE.
God bless,
Sam Kennedy
http://www.guardiansofthefreerepublics.com
____________________
P.S. Here are links to the January 31, 2010 broadcast sent in by listeners:
Hour 1:
http://www.zshare.ne…969416ad804e00/
Hour 2:
http://www.zshare.ne…969710b7fee8b0/
You can also download the broadcast or listen on the internet at:
http://republicbroadcasting.org
Or listen in real time at:
http://educationcenter2000.com/The Final Remedy_Sam Kennedy.htm
______________________
Dr. Sam Kennedy
Host: TAKE NO PRISONERS
Republic Broadcasting network
http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/
The Save America Crusade
FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY – NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS. MOST PROBLEMS ARE SELF-CREATED.
_______________
P.S. IMMEDIATE GOALS OF THE RESTORE AMERICA PLAN
– Ending foreclosure and bank collection actions immediately (our first and seventh directives)
– Ending tax prosecutions immediately (second and sixth directives)
– Ending invasions, prosecutions and detentions for fictitious crimes against the state that lack an injured party other than insurrection, treason and frauds against the United States (third and eighth directives)
– Ending molestation on the byways (fourth and ninth directives)
– Production of sovereign identification and passports that do not proclaim subject-class citizenship (fourth and ninth directives)
– Restoration of the trappings of proper de jure governance (fifth and tenth directives)
– Restoration of the common law of the Land (third and eighth directives)
– Reigning in of the admiralty color-of-law venue to the high seas (third and eighth directives)
– Restoration of the proper de jure judicial institutions such as the district court of the United States and the one supreme Court as constructed and restrained in the Constitution for the United States of America, c. 1787 (Phase 2, thirteenth through fifteenth directives)
– Re-absorption of the de facto judicial aberrations such as USDC into the de jure institutions (Phase 2, thirteenth through fifteenth directives)
– A PERMANENT TERMINATION OF TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT OUTSIDE CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS beginning with voiding of the Downes v. Bidwell monstrosity (Phase 2, eighteenth directive)
– Arrest and shackling of the District Court of the District of Columbia (Phase 2, sixteenth directive)
– Recognition of sovereign status in the police data banks of the land (fourth and ninth directives)
– A lawful and orderly removal of the corporate state as the ruler of every aspect of your life.
All to be accomplished – with your help – BEHIND THE SCENES, lawfully, peacefully, without violence and without risking civil war.
______________
The following are available at:
– COLLECTING IN BANKRUPTCY SEMINAR for enforcing payment. Essential information for anyone considering entering that forum.
– ATTORNEY REPELLANT PACKAGE to predictably avert civil suit or threat by making it impossible for counsel to file the lawsuit.
– ROCKLAND SEMINAR – the landmark workshop where comprehensive administrative process was introduced including all the bells and whistles such as self executing powers of attorney and confession of judgment…
– CONTRACT DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PACKAGE
______________
(Dr.) Sam Kennedy
Host: TAKE NO PRISONERS
Republic Broadcasting network
http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/
The Save America Crusade
FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY – NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS. MOST PROBLEMS ARE SELF-CREATED.
__________________________
* To be removed from this email list, please contact “ restore.america@hotmail.com” from the address you wish removed.
* PLEASE NOTE: The email address from where these weekly emails are sent is not monitored. Questions sent to that address are lost forever.
_________________
HORSE'S MOUTH CONFESSIONS
(can be reviewed in less than 30 minutes).
Please Goggle or use the included links:
– “28 USC 3002” (definition of the United States as a Federal corporation never taught in civics class; go to paragraph 15) ( http://www.law.corne…02—-000-.html )
– “27 CFR 72.11” (U.S. Inc. defines all crime as commercial as a result of the fall of the republic when the South walked out of congress in 1861 and the de jure congress, unable to raise a quorum, was replaced by Lincoln with the de facto corporate Congress; and the de jure district court of the United States was replaced by the de facto corporate UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ( http://www.access.gp…27cfr72_98.html)
– “Executive Order 6102” (government's confiscation of your family's gold and wealth under threat of 10 years in prison for failure to comply. As the Order specifies U.S. “persons” (eg. JOHN SMITH and JANE DOE), law enforcement was duped into enforcing against the general public a command that only applied to Federal employees and members of the armed forces.) ( http://www.presidenc…x.php?pid=14611 or http://www.the-priva…nfiscation.html)
– “HJR 192” (outlawing of the simple act of “paying with money” as a felony by substituting the lawyer's parlor trick of “discharging” debts) ( http://www.truthsets….com/HJR192.htm or http://www.nomoredebt.cc/hjr192.html)
– “Congressman Louis McFadden speech” (indictment of the Secretary of the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board of Governor's for treason by the chairman of the House Banking and Currency committee in 1934. In scathing speeches to Congress, McFadden said: “(The Fed) has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government.” This most knowledgeable man on banking also explained in vivid detail the method for recruiting the Federal Reserve to pay our debts as holder of the gold, and which is at the heart of today's “tax remedies.”) ( http://www.geocities…fadden-frb.html or http://www.geocities…flaherty10.html and http://en.wikipedia….uis_T._McFadden)
– “Lewis v. United States 680” (Federal Reserve Bank is privately owned: “…we conclude that the Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purposes of the FTCA (Federal Tort Claims Act), but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations.” Lewis v United States, 680 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir. 1982). In other words, the Fed enjoys no United States immunity from law suit because it is a Federal institution in name only. ( http://nesara.org/co…ited_states.htm and http://www.geocities…erty/lewis.html)
– “Modern Money Mechanics” (The Fed's concise operational manual showing how money AND INTENTIONAL INFLATION are created from thin air by the Fed and it's member banks. The manual is very clear as to the power of created inflation to speed the process of confiscating your wealth. The section: “Who Creates Money?” and the final paragraph in “Bank Deposits – How They Expand or Contract” are worth extra attention.) ( http://www.rayservers.com/images/ModernMoneyMechanics.pdf or http://en.wikisource…cs/Introduction )
– “Grace Commission” (Confirmed that virtually ALL taxes actually go to the Federal Reserve Bank to pay interest on the U.S. debt to the banking families that own the International Monetary Fund (IMF): “With two-thirds of everyone's personal income taxes wasted or not collected, 100 percent of what is collected is absorbed solely by interest on the Federal debt and by Federal Government contributions to transfer payments. In other words, all individual income tax revenues are gone before one nickel is spent on the services which taxpayers expect from their Government.” J. Peter Grace, Cover letter, President's Private Sector Report on Cost Control, January 12, 1984. Peter Grace was considered the Warren Buffett of his time, and the Grace Commission Report received widespread media attention as the gospel of Reagan's so-called tax system overhaul.) ( http://www.freecanad…cles/grace.html or http://www.uhuh.com/…ff/gracecom.htm)
– “31 CFR 103.11” (Promissory note is defined as a “monetary instrument:” “(u) Monetary instruments…Monetary instruments include…All negotiable instruments (including personal checks, business checks, official bank checks, cashier's checks, third-party checks, promissory notes (as that term is defined in the Uniform Commercial Code), and money orders) that are either in bearer form, endorsed without restriction, made out to a fictitious payee (for the purposes of Sec. 103.23), or otherwise in such form that title thereto passes upon delivery.”) ( http://edocket.acces…31cfr103.11.htm or http://www.ffiec.gov…ns/31CFR103.htm )
– “NYUCC 3-104” (Promissory note is defined as a “negotiable instrument:” “(1) Any writing to be a negotiable instrument within this Article must (a) be signed by the maker or drawer; and (
contain an unconditional promise or order to pay a sum certain in money and no other promise, order, obligation or power given by the maker or drawer except as authorized by this Article; and © be payable on demand or at a definite time; and (d) be payable to order or to bearer. (2) A writing which complies with the requirements of this section is (a) a “draft” (“bill of exchange”) if it is an order; ( a “check” if it is a draft drawn on a bank and payable on demand; © a “certificate of deposit” if it is an acknowledgment by a bank of receipt of money with an engagement to repay it; (d) a “note” if it is a promise other than a certificate of deposit.) ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/3/3-104.html) – “Senate Report 93-549” (The United States has been under dictatorial control since March 9, 1933. Report of the Special Committee on the Termination of the National Emergency, Senate Report 93-549, War and Emergency Powers Acts, November 19, 1973. “Foreward: Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency…These proclamations give force to 470 provisions of Federal law. These hundreds of statutes delegate to the President extraordinary powers, ordinarily exercised by the Congress, which affect the lives of American citizens in a host of all-encompassing manners. This vast range of powers, taken together, confer enough authority to rule the country without reference to normal Constitutional processes. Under the powers delegated by these statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise; restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of all American citizens.”) ( http://www.scratchin…ob/war_ep1.html)
– “Foley Brothers, Inc. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281 (1949).” (U.S. regulations apply only within the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. “It is a well established principle of law that all federal regulation applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contrary intent appears.”)
– “Caha v. US, 152 U.S. 211 (1894)” (U.S. regulations apply only within the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. “The laws of Congress in respect to those matters [outside of Constitutionally delegated powers] do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government.”)
– “U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222.” (U.S. regulations apply only within the U.S. territories and the District of Columbia. “There is a canon of legislative construction which teaches Congress that, unless a contrary intent appears [legislation] is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”)
– “Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901).” (Purportedly decided if the constitution applies to U.S. territories. In actuality, unleashed the great fraud of unlimited statutory power misapplied throughout the continental united States of America. Dissenting opinion of Justice Marshall Harlan. “…two national governments, one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions, the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to…a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result…We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism…It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence.” In other words, a genuine de jure united States of America congress is always bound to enact laws within the jurisdiction of the constitution. He held tyo the obvious truth that congress does not exist, let alone have powers, outside the constitution. Harlan said, “This nation is under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the land and the only source of the powers which our government, or any branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place.”)
– Section 802, Patriot Act. (Defining the People as terrorists. Defining terrorism as a maritime event. Excluding private meetings on the land from terrorism: “(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that–(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (
appear to be intended– (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and © occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”) ( http://www.ratical.o…Section802.html) _________________
INDEX TO RECENT TOPICS (2008 mostly) – TAKE NO PRISONERS
– Repelling attorneys (July 6, 2008, July 13, 2008, Aug. 17, 2008, Oct. 12, 2008)
– Contract disputes – settling (Jan 13, 2008, Jan. 20, 2008, Feb. 24, 2008)
– Rescinding testimony – grand jury or other (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Return of process letter (Nov. 9, 2008)
– Returning process – 3 methods without entering the Bar (Nov. 9, 2008)
– Returning process orally by tribal attorney (Nov. 9, 2008)
– Returning process orally with prayer outside the Bar (Nov. 9, 2008)
– Returning process after having appeared (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Returning subpoenas, summonses and complaints (Oct 19, 2008, Nov. 23, 2008)
– Subpoenas – six ways to handle (Oct. 19, 2008)
– Subpoenas (Dec 8, 2007)
– Summons – handling (June 1, 2008 (part 1), June 22, 2008 (part 2))
– Complaint – handling (June 1, 2008)
– Records – affidavit denying existence (July 13, 2008)
– Investigation – handling (Aug. 24, 2008)
– Arraignment – handling (Oct. 19, 2008, Oct. 26, 2008)
– Indictment (Dec. 16, 2007)
– Arrest – treatise on handling (August 10, 2008)
– Grand jury hearing – handling (Oct. 19, 2008)
– Court hearing – handling (Aug. 31, 2008)
– IRS hearing (July 13, 2008)
– FBI interview – handling (June 8, 2008)
– Trial – interview with Tom Schaults (Aug 24, 2008, Aug. 31, 2008)
– Appear or not? (Nov. 23, 2008)
– Rejecting dismissal of the counterclaim (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Denial of a corporation (Aug. 10, 2008)
– De constructing the De facto Courtroom (June 30, July 20, 2008, July 27, 2008, Aug. 31, 2008, Sept. 7, 2008, Sept. 14, 2008, Oct. 5, 2008)
– Basic courtroom procedure (Sept. 7, 2008, Oct. 5, 2008)
– Courtroom procedure (June 30, July 20, 2008, July 27, 2008, Aug. 31, 2008, Sept. 7, 2008, Sept. 14, 2008, Oct. 5, 2008)
– Making the record (Oct. 5, 2008)
– Probation – a primer (Dec. 30, 2007)
– Sentencing (Dec. 30, 2007)
– Reporting to prison (Dec. 30, 2007)
– Repelling arrest for failure to appear (Dec. 8, 2007)
– Repelling prison sentence (Dec. 8, 2007)
– Prison extraction (Nov. 10, 2007, Dec 15, 2007, Dec. 16, 2007)
– Names – handling the name issue (Sept. 14, 2008)
– Special sovereign victory (Jan 13, 2008, Jan 20, 2008)
– Basic UCC Redemption process, Part 1 (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Seals (Nov. 30, 2008, Dec. 7, 2008)
– Instant Affidavit (Oct. 5, 2008)
– Basic UCC process for zeroing and funding account (Dec. 7, 2008)
– BC Bond for funding account (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Fidelity bond – debunking the myth (Aug. 31, 2008)
– Criminal Code of Canada (Sept. .28, 2008, Oct. 5, 2008)
– Perils of drafting Treasury – a caution (Dec. 22, 2007)
– Enforcement (Sept. 22, 2007, Sept. 23, 2007, June 1, 2008, July 20, 2008, Sept. .28, 2008, Oct. 5, 2008)
– Enforcement with 18 USC 2071, 75 and 76 (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Enforcement with BIC – comprehensive approach (Sept. 22, 2007, Sept. 23, 2007)
– Enforcement (comprehensive) – with letter form the Queen (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Enforcement with liens (Apr. 13, 2008)
– Counterclaim (Nov 11, 2007)
– Arresting a bond (June 1, 2008)
– Arresting successor surety – a lien against title (Dec. 8, 2007, Dec. 9, 2007, Dec. 15, 2007, Dec. 16, 2007)
– Dunn & Bradstreet (Apr. 13, 2008)
– Notary for enforcement (Sept. 2, 2007, Sept. 9, 2007, Sept. 29, 2007)
– Trial by notary (Sept. 9, 2007)
– Commercial liens (Apr. 13, 2008)
– Criminal complaints (Dec. 8, 2007), Apr. 13, 2008)
– Drowning in public policy (Feb. 24, 2008)
– Power of Attorney (self-executing) (Oct. 19, 2008)
– Bankruptcy Court, delaying foreclosure, enforcing liens (Nov. 3, 2007, Nov. 10, 2007, Nov. 11, 2007, Feb. 24, 2008)
– Issuing subpoenas (Dec 8, 2007)
– BIC (Sept. 22, 2007, Sept. 23, 2007, Dec. 15, 2007, Dec. 16, 2007, Jan. 6, 2008, Jan 13, 2008, Feb. 10, 2008, Feb 17, 2008, Feb. 24, 2008, May 25, 2008, June 1, 2008, June 8, 2008, June 22, 2008, June 30, 2008, Aug. 17, 2008, Aug. 24, 2008)
– BIC overview (Dec. 16, 2007)
– BIC and probation – a primer (Dec. 30, 2007)
– BIC safety modification (Aug.17, 2008, Aug. 24, 2008)
– BIC Turbo – Canadian version outtake (Oct. 26, 2008)
– BIC turbo v. Turbo 9 and Turbo 8.3 (June 8, 2008)
– BIC Self-executing Power of Attorney (Oct. 19, 2008)
– BIC Comprehensive Administrative Remedy (Dec. 16, 2007)
– BIC Global Privacy Shield (Oct. 12, 2008)
– BIC Fundamentals (May 25, 2008)
– BIC offset bond (Nov. 4, 2007)
– Early and other introductory BIC topics can be found in the months prior to September 2007 not included in this list.
– Attorney Repellant Package for those facing threats of a civil lawsuit (July 6, 2008 (Part 1), July 13, 2008 (Part 2), Aug. 17, 2008, Oct. 12, 2008)
– Contract Dispute Settlement Package – settling (Jan 13, 2008, Jan. 20, 2008, Feb. 24, 2008)
– BIC Rescission Package (Dec 8, 2007)
– Notary process (June 8, 2008)
– Notaries – protecting the notary (Dec. 22, 2007, March 9, 2008, Aug. 17, 2008, Aug. 24, 2008)
– Notary under attack (Dec. 22, 2007)
– Notary as non-participant (Aug 24, 2008)
– Trial by Notary – Assembling a notary tribunal to issue and defend subpoenas
– Capitalization – the actual Biblical derivation for (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Solemn affirmations v. affidavits – Biblical derivation for affirmations (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Biblical rationale for Redemption process (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Punctuation in names (Dec. 7, 2008)
– Commercial philosophy (August 10, 2008)
– Creditor philosophy (Dec. 16, 2007, April 27, 2007)
– Mentoring (Mar. 2, 2008)
– Metering Corps (Mar. 2, 2008)
– Fear (Dec. 22, 2007, March 9, 2008, Aug. 10, 2008, Aug. 17, 2008)
– Safety (Aug.17, 2008, Aug. 24, 2008)
– HJR 192 (Nov. 23, 2008)
– Public Law 73-10 (Nov. 23, 2008)
– Public Law Statutes-at-large, 48 Chap 48, Stat. 112 (Nov. 23, 2008)
– Abatement (June 1, 2008, Nov. 23, 2008)
– Abatement – returning process orally with prayer outside the Bar (Nov. 9, 2008)
– Tom Schaults interview (June 30, 2008, July 20, 2008, July 27, 2008, Aug. 24, 2008, Aug. 31, 2008)
– McFadden Remedy (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Congressman Louis McFadden (Nov. 30, 2008)
– Elaine Brown – Commentary on purported use of a 1099 (August 10, 2008
– Sponsoring the credit – the philosophy of tax remedies (Dec. 16, 2007, April 27, 2008)
– OID method (Jan. 6, 2008, Jan. 13, 2008, , April 27, 2008, May 4, 2008, May 4, 2008, May 11, 2008, May 18, 2008, June 8, 2008, Oct. 26, 2008, Nov. 16, 2008)
– Tax remedies – conclusions of ZYA v “A” method (Nov. 16, 2008)
– ZYA (June 8, 2008, Nov. 16, 2008)
– “A” method intro (April 27, 2008)
– 1099 process – to use or not (Nov. 16, 2008)
– 1099 process – misuse of Form 1096 with likely prosecutions (Oct. 26, 2008, Nov. 16, 2008)
– 1099 process – 6 levels of safety in court cases (Oct. 26, 2008)
Folks, most any of those topics can be a remedy for men and women who treat them as acorns to be researched and developed as part of a comprehensive program of spiritual growth and learning. The list was compiled from broadcast summaries, so my apologies for the many other topics not mentioned in the summaries which are not included in the list, and for any errors or typos.
CAUTION: Please be aware of my tendency to create “technology” on the fly as needed. Which means that some topics are seasoned and some are fresh off the drawing board. So please be cautious in YOUR decisions, and when handling emails that seek to use fear to suppress the free flow of information that made all this information possible. If we had heeded the call for quiet suffering instead of public exchange of ideas, none of these topics would have materialized.
Shalom,
KISS: Keep it simple s…..
Declaration of Land Patent should be simple.
Remember, you are not filing a Land Patent.
With the notable exception of one party in California all Land is already Patented.
You are only invoking your Rights.
Also, remember, there are essentially three categories of people in America; immigrants, share croppers and Land owners. Which are you? And, if you want to sit on a proper Grand Jury in Law, it will have to have someone on it who is a Land Owner. A Deed is not indcia of Land ownership. In Deed only demonstrates use/equity rights.
Feel free to forward to whomever.
Shalom,
Rabbi Shawn Rice, JD
Non-Bar
-
Here is Sam Kennedy's website:
-
SOURCE: http://www.reuters.c…ype=marketsNews
_________________
US court skeptical of Fed push for bailout secrecy
Mon, Jan 11 2010* Press seeks details of Fed bailout programs
* Fed says disclosure could hurt banks, financial system
* Bloomberg says disclosure breeds confidence
* News Corp's Fox News also opposes Fed
By Kristina Cooke and Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK, Jan 11 (Reuters) – A federal appeals court on Monday appeared skeptical of U.S. Federal Reserve efforts to prevent the press and the public from learning the names of participants in emergency lending programs designed to support and bail out the financial system.
The central bank has argued that disclosure would cause “competitive and reputational harm” to participants, perhaps triggering bank runs, and impede its ability “to effectively manage the current, and any future, financial crisis.”
Bloomberg News and News Corp's Fox News Network LLC had sought details of the Fed's actions under the federal Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA, which requires government agencies to make documents available to the public.
A release of data could give the public, including bank shareholders, a better sense of how the Fed was moving to prop up the financial system during what is widely considered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
In a 1-3/4 hour oral argument, a panel of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan questioned the Fed argument that if potential participants knew they might be named, they might choose not to borrow rather than face a possible “stigma” for seeming to be in trouble.
This, the Fed had argued, could harm the broader financial system.
“I'm having a little trouble with it being a stigma outside of, basically, a day,” Circuit Judge Peter Hall told Matthew Collette, a lawyer representing the Fed.
“You're talking of a crisis of a moment, or maybe a few days, or a week,” Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs added.
Collette said that if banks were dissuaded from borrowing out of fear their names would be disclosed, it could harm their businesses and force them into unwanted activities, perhaps including fire sales of assets or firings of employees.
“The stigma is very real,” Collette said. “This is a problem in which there will be an assumption, potentially, that this bank is in trouble.”
BREEDING CONFIDENCE
Bloomberg brought its case to force the Fed to release records of actions it took to shore up the financial system starting in late 2007, including the March 2008 sale of Bear Stearns Cos to JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Emergency lending programs have more than doubled the Fed's balance sheet to am amount in excess of $2.2 trillion, especially following the Sept. 15, 2008, collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc .
FOIA “breeds confidence in our public institutions, which quite frankly is something that is sorely needed right now,” said Thomas Golden, a lawyer for Bloomberg.
Bloomberg had won its case in Manhattan district court in August. Chief District Judge Loretta Preska ruled that the Fed failed to show that disclosing names could lead to a “downward spiral of financial instability.”
Fox News, in contrast, lost its case in the same court the prior month. Judge Alvin Hellerstein said “the national economy is not so out of danger, and the frailty of banks so different now … as to make the board's concern academic.”
An appeals court panel typically takes several weeks or months to rule. Its ruling may be appealed to the full court or to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Clearing House Association LLC, an industry-owned group of banks, supported the Fed's position.
This group includes the ABN Amro Bank NV unit of Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Bank of America Corp , Bank of New York Mellon Corp , Citigroup Inc , Deutsche Bank AG , HSBC Holdings Plc , JPMorgan Chase & Co, UBS AG , US Bancorp and Wells Fargo & Co .
“The press would like a blanket rule and change nearly 100 years of central banking policy in this country,” said Robert Giuffra, a lawyer for the Clearing House. “The problem is, you can't set a blanket rule.” He urged the court to step back and leave it to Congress to set disclosure rules.
The Bloomberg case is Bloomberg LP v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al, U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 09-4083. The Fox News case in the same court is Fox News Network LLC v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System et al, No. 09-3795. (Reporting by Kristina Cooke and Jonathan Stempel; Additional reporting by Chris Sanders; Editing by Steve Orlofsky)
-
Will Obama Nationalize U.S. Pensions?
By Bob Bauman
That was the serious question I proposed one year ago in my blog – and it's time to ask that question again.
Why now? Because President Obama has proposed what one of our experts sees as the “first step in stealth nationalization and forced investment of our retirement benefits.”
The bad news comes as part of a tax package said to be aimed at middle-income Americans in Obama's State of the Union speech, as reported by Business Week magazine.
Obama's stealth proposal is billed by him as an “effort to increase retirement savings by requiring all businesses to offer automatic IRA accounts,” but it drew immediate opposition from U.S. small associations. Obama claims the plan would let employees automatically enroll in direct-deposit retirement accounts and expand matching tax credits.
Dangerous First Step to Nationalization
But Larry C. Grossman, CFP, CIMA, (right) managing director of Sovereign International PensionServices (no relation) and a member of our Sovereign Society Council of Experts, sees the Obama idea as a dangerous move.
Says Larry, “If you read it closely you will see the heart of the proposal is the requirement to keep 10% of the funds in U.S. Treasuries. At the stroke of a pen the president has found a way to bolster the declining demand for Treasuries. I believe forcing retirement plans into U.S. government control is the next step.”
This alarm was echoed by Ron Holland, (left) editor of the Inner Circle Intelligence Report published by BFI Consulting AG, a Swiss financial advisory firm, and a long time member of the Sovereign Society Council of Experts.
Says Ron, “I think the mandatory IRAs just proposed by Obama is the first step in stealth nationalization and forced investment of our retirement benefits to support the U.S. Treasury debt market.”
Should you be worried about this latest radical Obama move?
There is an estimated $15 trillion worth of private retirement plans in the United States; $4 trillion in IRAs alone; this constitutes 35% percent of all private assets in America. That is what Obama government is eyeing to help plug the multi-trillion dollar deficit in his big spending budget.
You could call this move Obama's attempt to “pull an Argentina.”
What's “An Argentina?”
In October 2008, Peronista president Cristina Kirchner of Argentina (right) confiscated US$30 billion worth in that country's ten privately managed pension funds. This was presented as an emergency measure to meet her faltering government's financing costs. The Argentine congress went along with this radical property grab of individual retirement accounts, 401Ks and the like.
Could this happen in America?
Larry Grossman's opinion, “There have been several different academic papers published which have given rise to rumors. At least one congressional hearing on nationalizing pensions has been held. It is difficult to decide in what form it would take if something like this occurred in the U.S. Many believe that if indeed this is approaching, the best way to protect your assets is to place your retirement funds offshore now.”
Ron Holland says, “I believe we must fight this proposal and similar plans or else the private retirement system and our retirement wealth will be history in a few short years.” Ron has produced a special report on this radical grab entitled, “The Obama Retirement Trap Has Started!”
If you would like to review the entire report you can request the full report by sending an email request to ron.holland@bfi-consulting.com.
Act Now
In my opinion, adopting such a retirement confiscation policy would be another major blow to Americans' confidence and to any chance of economic recovery; it would further devalue the dollar; and it would destroy what little remains of the credibility of Obama and his socialist government.
Folks, I served in the U.S. Congress when Democrats were overwhelmingly in control. I've seen what happens when the Republicans are in charge, as well. Meaning simply, anything can happen – so hold on to your wallet…and your retirement account!
Sincerely,
Bob Bauman, Legal Counsel
-
EDITORIAL: An email recently sent out by Sam Kennedy. We didn't write this.
Below you will see the directives emailed from Sam K…folks the time has come to put and end to the illusionary world of foreign Corporations controlling living men and women…..as a result of over a year of talking with the military, the document is what was dictated by the military to be contained in the document and put into our own words to meet the goal at hand….please do not contact me requesting the document in advance if you wish to view the document then respond as instructed below and you will review it before you place your signature to the document itself….if you feel as though what you have in place now is better and don't need a change or you have your own ideas that need to be implemented before your become a signator or coordinator then please proceed with your own personal agenda….the document is not up for discussion or change….we simply followed the bases of what the military needed to act in the event the corporate officers wish to ignore the orders of the grand juries….the corporate actors are ordered to end all foreclosures, end all tax related matters, end all commercial crimes without an injured party etc…from the highest levels in the military this may be your last chance to correct, before the ax falls…please forward to all your friends and family….you may wish to listen to Dr. Sam Kennedy's Sunday broadcast for more details {Republic Broadcasting Network} which is included at the end of Sam's email…please folks i am overrun with things to do at the moment and will not have time to cover the bases with everyone or even one for that matter, so do your own homework and then decide, time is short however…the response has been super to this point, even folks from Canada wishing to assist their brothers from the south, in hopes we will soon return the favor…Dorothy has finally come home and the OZ was just quoted as saying “OH”……..regan dwayne
Fellows,
Today's email follows. Please note item 7. We should not even be engaging in conversations defending why the document is not released. Take the high ground. Join us if you would like. Or sit back and enjoy not being molested on the byways. When you see the email sight, you will see hundreds who already want in…
UPDATE ON THE RESTORE AMERICA PLAN
_________________________
Please do NOT reply to THIS email account!!!!! – IT IS TEMPORARY AND NOT MONITORED. Do NOT add this address to your list. Any questions sent to this box are LOST FOREVER. For questions, please send your email to restore.america@hotmail.com
__________________________
To my fellow patriots,
America has spoken! Hundreds of you volunteered to join the De jure Grand Juries before Sunday nightâ€(tm)s broadcast of TAKE NO PRISONERS was finished. Men and women just like yourself, who love freedom and wish to embrace the posterity for their children and grandchildren took not a moment to decide that this was the time to reinhabit the original de jure institutions of their forefathers. The message is that you are not alone. Thousands of you already realize that YOUR fate is finally in YOUR hands, and that it is NO LONGER NECESSARY to beg others for your blessings, to grovel before false prophets, to plead with corporate actors for scraps from the table, to delay your life any longer due to hollow promises, to crawl like snakes on your belly for the privileges of the bar association legal franchise. All of that, the shameful era of corporate worship, is to be concluded, peacefully, quietly, honorably, by men and women of good faith just like yourself, BY YOUR OWN DECLARATION, within the next couple of months. We welcome each and every one of you to the freedom buffet.
A few important points to read carefully:
1. Those of you who have ALREADY JOINED ASSEMBLIES ARE VERY WELCOME to take the covenant of office for the Guardians of the Free Republics and the De jure Grand Juries. In this way, you can enjoy direct participation in restoring sovereign control over the institutions of YOUR government without the sort of public pronouncements and local provocations that incite resistance and violence.
2. THOSE WHO CAN MUSTER AN ENTIRE BAND OF AT LEAST 25 PEOPLE ready to go for this cause, please send an email to: TheRestoreAmericaPlan@gmail.com with the following message in the subject line:
HAVE ENTIRE ASSEMBLY – Name of your republic
3. Other than the above, IF YOU HAVE ALREADY SENT AN EMAIL TO TheRestoreAmericaPlan@gmail.com volunteering to join or coordinate, or requesting more information, please do NOT SEND ANOTHER. We are hard at work processing all of the requests and organizing them republic by republic. Please sit tight, confident in knowing that you will not be forgotten. We are on the job.
You see folks, once you understand that the REMEDY IS GLOBAL ACROSS THE NATION and does NOT REQUIRE THE BLESSINGS OF THE ACTORS, and does NOT require each man and women to continue fighting their battles as islands in the wind, you should understand that the only thing that matters at this time is that we assemble a certain minimum number of courageous people according to our plan and bring forth the remedy behind the scenes.
4. IF YOU CONTACTED ME, PERSONALLY, AT my own email address (Restore.America@hotmail.com) instead of at TheRestoreAmericaPlan@gmail.com, then PLEASE SEND AN EMAIL to: TheRestoreAmericaPlan@gmail.com so your request is sure to wind up properly processed. Please mark the subject line as the case may be:
WISH TO JOIN – Name of your republic
WISH TO COORDINATE – Name of your republic, or
HAVE ENTIRE ASSEMBLY – Name of your republic
5. IF YOU HAVE NOT CONTACTED US BUT WISH TO JOIN THE GRAND JURIES, please send an email as in step 2 above.
6. SHOULD YOU VOLUNTEER? Your life does not hinge on whether or not you volunteer at this particular time. The remedy will be available for ALL members of the sovereign People since it is THE DE FACTO INSTITUTIONS THAT WILL BE ADJUSTING GLOBALLY, rather than the sovereign People. May I suggest you begin to adjust your mind set to once again being masters of your own domains.
7. INSPECTING THE DOCUMENTS. The final complete Declaration document will be available ONLY through the state and/or regional coordinators for inspection so that the integrity of our strategy is preserved. Many of the details of The Restore America Plan will remain classified to preserve the strategy. But permit me to refer you to last Sunday nightâ€(tm)s broadcast (January 31, 2010) for an extensive overview of the Plan. Apparently our disclosures, and your knowledge of my guests, were sufficient to convince hundreds of you to consider signing-up. As you might expect, members of the de jure grand juries must take a traditional grand juror's pledge of secrecy to protect the public. And as you may know from the broadcast, we are NOT planning public proclamations, nor do we covet the limelight.
Permit me to clarify some of that information. Initially, the de facto insurance bonds of certain public officials will be attached rendering the respective offices subject to re-absorption into their de jure counterparts. Actors will have three days to comply or be removed as they will no longer have the pretense of authority in the face of de jure governance. Using a progression of specific writs, our first priority is to terminate foreclosure actions, collection procedures, tax prosecutions and prosecutions without an injured party on the state and national levels. Simultaneously, sovereign identification will be designed by the public institutions responsible for such items. Police databases will be adjusted. Certain trappings of government will be modified to reflect the return of lawful government as notice to the public. Subtle notice for sure, just like in 1933. I hope you agree that is a worthy start to the reconstruction.
In the second phase, the D.C. courts will be reabsorbed into the Article III institutions. And so on. The specific methodology must remain classified for strategic purposes.
Some of these events will occur DIRECTLY THROUGH PUBLIC ACTORS, and others will occur through military liaison. If you study military history and publications, you probably understand that the militaryâ€(tm)s duty to obey proper civilian authority is an intrinsic part of their consciousness. The United States Army and Navy Manual of Military Government and Civil Affairs outlines military authority to recover domestic territory from enemy occupation, restore civilian government, retain proper civilian laws, remove high-ranking political officials from office, supervise civilian courts, protect money, promote banking and release political prisoners. So the militaryâ€(tm)s offer was not just happenstance. They understand we have been under occupation since 1861, and in a perpetual state of corporate national emergency since 1933 by declaration of every single CEO of the United States Federal Corporation since then, permitting those CEOs the luxury of unbridled powers outside normal constitutional limitations (Senate Report 93-549).
8. SELF-ACTUALIZING REMEDY. Notwithstanding, the military is NOT necessary for your remedy. You do not need yet another champion you cannot control. Do NOT shift your hopes and desires to yet another Caesar. The power rests with YOU, with all of the collective members of the sovereign People who make a simple collective decision to preserve their divine energy from corporate trespass by assembling within the very eloquent and elegant unanimous Declaration of the sovereign People of 2010. The very act of regulating the Guardians of the Free Republics in all fifty republics and re-inhabiting the de jure grand juries comprises the remedy. Not just in theory. The one tactical element understood better than all others by the corporate bureaucrats is fear. They have used it recklessly to subjugate the People on behalf of the banking cartels. When confronted with men and women who occupy the authentic lawful institutions of government IN FACT, their conscious fear of liability, in and of itself, is like the artillery reigning down on the Iraqi Republican Guard. These are, after all, attorneys-at-law, men schooled in legal process, the fabric of which is woven from limited liability. The liability of those who would impede lawful governance is no less than insurrection and treason – across the land. And…they…know…it. The story of Regan Dwayne which I shared with you on Sundayâ€(tm)s broadcast is one of many such examples.
So in essence, YOU are the remedy. And the long patriot tradition of seeking remedy in the promises and glorious speeches of others, in the handouts from bureaucrats, in the demonic corporate statutes, in the discretion of corporate actors who would just as soon grind you to dust than face the Law, can come to an end. The remedy is in the choices YOU make over the next few weeks. Isnâ€(tm)t it time to retrieve our dignity?
The Guardian Elders are but four men who have made a decision to facilitate the end of economic warfare against the sovereign People by bringing you a wake up call. What else could we do as our brothers and sisters continue to suffer such hardship at the hands of a corporation posing as a legitimate government? Our name signifies nothing other than our willingness to bear the brunt of the task, but we do not hold ourselves out as prophets or promisors of dreams, glory or wealth beyond imagination. We do not wish to be glorified or idolized or distract you from the realization that the remedy lies within you. It is up to YOU to come together and reclaim your birth right in the presence of the Lord.
9. LINKS TO BROADCAST. Here are some links to download both hours of a recording of Sundayâ€(tm)s broadcast provided by a listener. As time is of the essence, I hope you will give it a listen as soon as possible:
Hour 1:
http://www.zshare.ne…969416ad804e00/
Hour 2:
http://www.zshare.ne…969710b7fee8b0/
We will continue our discussion of The Restore America Plan next Sunday night on TAKE NO PRISONERS at 8 PM Eastern time, 7 PM Central time, 6 PM Mountain time and 5 PM Pacific time. You can listen on the Internet at:
http://republicbroadcasting.org
As you may know, the massive audience Sunday night brought the network down. I am assured that is being remedied as we speak. Please note that the call-in phone number listed at the Republic Broadcasting Network website is NOT NOT NOT for listening to the program, but for callers to ask questions and participate. The best way to listen is on the internet either at the RBN website or through Shoutcast. The Shoutcast app on iPhones and Blackberrys is another way to listen live. Just search for Republic Broadcasting Network through the app.
On behalf of the Guardian Elders, we thank you for reading, and ask if you would kindly circulate this email far and wide if you are of a mind.
God bless,
Sam Kennedy
______________
Dr. Sam Kennedy
Host: TAKE NO PRISONERS
Republic Broadcasting network
http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/
The Save America Crusade
FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY – NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
PLEASE BE CAUTIOUS. MOST PROBLEMS ARE SELF-CREATED.
-
Lindsey Springer here and updating on my appeal to the Supreme Court from the published decision of the Tenth Circuit dated August 31, 2009 wherein the Tenth Circuit found that the penalty for failure to pay under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6651(a)(3) is not a penalty and where they found “interest” under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6601 is not a penalty.
I received permission to appeal on Thursday, January 28, 2010, by the Supreme Court and the docket number is 09-8858. My Writ of Mandamus is docketed at 09-8701 (in 5 working days the Supreme Court has docketed 157 cases. This means probably another 100 that were returned for defects, lost or misplaced. Imagine 250 cases per week times 52 weeks means 1000 cases a month are screaming to get into the Supreme Court. This equals 12,000 cases a year. When the Surpeme Court only hears 100 issues a year the message sent to Appellate and District Court Judges is that they have unlimited discretion and they are the “inferior court.” How can an court that is so inferior have so much power? I intend to change that. Granting me permission to appeal is a step in that direction. I realize most of you are unaware that some of us are required to obtain permission to appeal lower court decisions inlcuding tax court. Well, now you know!
The Tenth Circuit published the following on August 31, 2009:
“Mr. Springer is challenging the Tax Court’s determinations, claiming that he is not liable for the penalties and interest that the IRS has imposed in connection with the assessed income tax deficiencies because the IRS Form 1040 for each of the subject tax years did not comply with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), 44 U.S.C. §§ 3501-3549.
More specifically, Mr. Springer claims that § 3512 of the PRA provides him with a complete defense to at least part of his tax liabilities. Section 3512 is entitled “Public protection” and it provides as follows:
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information [from a federal agency] that is subject to this subchapter
if–
(1) the collection of information does not display a valid control number assigned by the Director [of the Office of Management and Budget] in accordance with this subchapter; or
(2) the agency fails to inform the person who is to respond to the collection of information that such person is not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a valid control number.
(b ) The protection provided by this section may be raised in the form of a complete defense, bar, or otherwise at any time during the agency administrative process or judicial action applicable thereto.
44 U.S.C. § 3512.
The words I have taken direct aim at are:
“Mr. Springer has not alleged any cognizable PRA violations with respect to those penalties. Instead, the only PRA violations he asserts concern the IRS Form 1040. The failure-to-pay penalties have an independent and separate statutory basis under the Internal Revenue Code, however, that is not based on Mr. Springer’s failure to file Form 1040s for the tax years in question.”
With respect to interest the Tenth Circuit published the following:
“Finally, with regard to the additional interest that was imposed in March 2005 under 26 U.S.C. § 6601(a) for each of the tax years in question, we agree with the Commissioner that the additional interest is not a “penalty” as that term is used in § 3512(a) of the PRA. See Aplee. Br. at 24 n.9. Although we have not found any case law addressing this issue, we conclude that the imposition of interest under the Internal Revenue Code does not fall within the PRA’s statutory definition of the term “penalty.” See 44 U.S.C. § 3502(14) (“the term ‘penalty’ includes the imposition by an agency or court of a fine or other punishment; a judgment for monetary damages or equitable relief; or the revocation, suspension, reduction, or denial of a license, privilege, right, grant, or benefit.”). This is consistent with the “clearly established principle that interest [imposed under the Internal Revenue Code] is not a penalty but is intended only to compensate the Government for delay in payment of a tax.”
With respect to the term “penalty” regarding failure to pay I have identified that Title 26, United States Code, Section 6151 places the payment of a tax to be due at the place where the requirement to file is to occur. I cited to the Supreme Court’s decision in Holywell Corp. v. Smith, 503 U.S. 47, 52 (1992)(“when a return of a tax is required . . . the person required to make such return shall . . . pay such tax”).
My defense is that a “Penalty under section 6651(a)(3) is clearly based upon Petitioner’s failure to file Form 1040s for the tax years in question. Failing to pay is based upon the purported requirement to pay and that purported duty begins with the requirement to file at Title 26, United States Code, Section 6091 with the “internal revenue district” and “district director” and ends with Section 6151’s obligation to pay “such tax at the time and place fixed for filing the return…(with such district director)” [“At a bare minimum, in cases such as this one, in which the complex statutory and regulatory scheme lends itself to any number of interpretations, we should be inclined to rely on the traditional canon that construes revenue-raising laws against their drafter.” See Leavell v. Blades, 237 Mo. 695, 700-701, 141 S.W. 893, 894 (1911) (“When the tax gatherer puts his finger on the citizen, he must also put his finger on the law permitting it”); United States v. Merriam, 63 U.S. 179, 188 (1923) (“If the words are doubtful, the doubt must be resolved against the Government and in favor of the taxpayer”); Bowers v. New York & Albany Lighterage Co., 273 U.S. 346, 350 (1927) (“The provision is part of a taxing statute; and such laws are to be interpreted liberally in favor of the taxpayers”). Accord, American Net & Twine Co. v. Worthington, 141 U.S. 468, 474 (1891); Benziger v. United States, 192 U.S. 38, 55 (1904). “Tax laws, like all other laws, are made to be obeyed. They should therefore be intelligible to those who are expected to obey them.” Philadelphia Storage Battery Co. v. Lederer, 21 F.2d 320, 321, 322.]
I continue “[T]his Court said nearly a century ago when the “word `file’ was not defined by Congress” involved in construing a criminal act, that “the etymology of the word must be considered and ordinary meaning applied.” United States v. Lombardo, 241 U.S. 73, 76 (1916) This Court went on to say that the “word `file’ is derived from the Latin word `filum,’ and relates to the ancient practice of placing papers on a thread or wire for safe keeping and ready reference.” Id. “Filing, it must be observed, is not complete until the document is delivered and received. `Shall file’ means to deliver to the office and not send through the United States mails. Gates v. State, 128 N.Y. Court of Appeals, 221.” Id. “A paper is filed when it is delivered to the proper official and by him received and filed. Bouvier Law Dictionary; White v. Stark, 134 Cal. 178; Westcott v. Eccles, 3 Utah 258; In re Van Varcke, 94 F. 352; Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Phiney, 76 F. 618.” Id, at 77 “Anything short of delivery would leave the filing a disputable fact, and that would not be consistent with the spirit of the act.”
“The Tenth Circuit, prior to the Panel decision being appealed herein, noted in United States v. Collins, 920 F.2d 619, 630 n.13 (10th Cir. 1990) that ‘because the provision of information in 1040 forms is inexorably linked to the statutory requirement to pay taxes, and defendant failed to file such forms, the Paperwork Reduction Act was applicable to such conduct.'”
The Supreme Court in Dole v. United Steelworkers of America, 494 U.S. 26, 33 (1990) determined the public protection applies to all government Forms and that “typical information collection requests include tax forms,…”
The suggestion by the Tenth Circuit that a “penalty” is not a “penalty” is looking the beast square in the eyes. I hope you all see that.
With regard to “interest” not being a penalty under the definition of penalty in the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, I argued that the fact no case has ever addressed this issue in our nations history is telling but alone not compelling.
I argue that “[/size]nterest on a tax deficiency is separately mandated by 26 U.S.C. § 6601(a).” Commissioner v. McCoy,484 U.S. 3,71987) “A penalty that accrues under § 6651(a)(3) is also separate and outside the scope of the petition to the Tax Court.” Id. See McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 431 (1819) (“[T]he power to tax involves the power to destroy”); quoted in Atherton v. FDIC, 519 U.S. 213, 221 (1997)
I ask “s interest on a tax deficiency a fine? Title 26, United States Code, Section 6665(a)(2) provides that “any reference in this title to `tax’ imposed by this title shall be deemed also to refer to the additions to tax, additional amounts, and penalties provided by this chapter.” Kollar v. Commissioner, 131 T.C. No. 12 (fn.5)(T.C. 11-25-2008) See also Aranda v. Commissioner, 432 F.3d 1140, 1143 (10th Cir. 2005)(“interest and fraud penalties are treated as taxes”)”
Is interest an “other punishment”? Congress frequently refers to interest as an “addition” to tax and that for assessment purposes interest is treated as a tax. See Kollar and Agranda above.
Is interest a form of monetary damages? The Panel said it is to “compensate the Government for delay in payment of the tax.” Clearly to compensate for delay is to compensate for damage. The Tenth Circuit has previously found that “allowance of interest is essential to just compensation for damages. If the amount of unliquidated claims may be determined with reasonable accuracy, interest may be allowed. P. (Bum) Gibbons v. Utah Home Fire Ins. Co., 202 F.2d 469, 473 (10th Cir. 1953) To award “interest” is to compensate for damages. See Brooklyn Bank v. O’Neil
, 324 U.S. 697, 715 (1945)(“..fact that interest is customarily allowed as compensation for delay in payment.”)
I conclude “[T]he amounts claimed owed are wholly based upon ‘returns prepared by the Secretary’ apparently through a purported delegate in 1996. Interest is also directly and inexorably linked to the filing of a return and the payment of any tax alleged to have been owed therein. Without a Form 1040 to have been determined required to have been filed, and that the amounts proposed on Rice’s Notice of Intent to Levy were classified as ‘additions’ to the Form 1040, there would be no way to apply or consider interest under Section 6601.”
Interest under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6601 is clearly and inexorably linked to the filing of a Form 1040 and the payment of taxes (even though the tax is a Bureau of Labor Statistics Tax).
To find otherwise is to actually turn protection from penalty under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6651(a)(1) to cause other penalties to be triggered [and owed] that would not have been triggered if it were not for the public protection provision. This creates an absurd result. Something Congress certainly could not have intended.
Lastly, the Panel found the Commissioner made a frivolous argument(s) about what the Tenth Circuit had held in previous appeals that I had filed. The Panel concluded that I raised difficult issues between the tax code and the PRA.
What I find amazing and shocking is that here we as people are presumed to “know the law” (remember ignorance of the law is no excuse) when that benefits the Government Attorneys and when the law we know of benefits, and is for the benefit of, the public, like the public protection provision, Sections 3502 and 3512 (this is not about taxes), the public first must argue with the Commissioner’s wannabes that the law even exists. Next we have to argue to Tax Court who threatens sanctions for administratively challenging penalties, including interest, with no explanation backing up the threat (no person ever addressed interest as penalty should shock you as it did me)(certainly not settled law now is it).
Next we have to get permission to appeal that decision to an Article III Court. Then we have to survive erroneous claims of frivolous and threats of sanctions by one of the 10,000 Government full time Attorneys (A person who goes to law school is clearly being courted to work for the Government) including filing restrictions even more than already exists. And final, we get to the place where the merits are to be addressed, and words that have normal every day established meaning, like penalty, are turned upside down by the Tenth Circuit because the only other option is to make a finding the Form 1040 does not comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act. We already have the finding that Form 1040 is required to comply. Knock Knock!
I will admit when the term at issue is not defined by Congress, like “file” or “filum” that “the etymology of the word must be considered and ordinary meaning applied.” United States v. Lombardo, 241 U.S. 73, 76 (1916) However, as the Tenth Circuit repeatedly has found “penalty” is defined by Congress. Remember the power to destroy is the power to tax?
Ask yourself whether penalty or interest calculated from the date a payment is alleged to have been due is compensation for damages or seeking a “judgement for monetary damages”? With this in mind, the questions I have presented are as follows:
1. What is the consequence to the “jurisdiction” of the Secretary of the Treasury and Commissioner of the Internal Revenue’s claims of statutory additions, penalty or interest, exercised outside the District of Columbia, when the office of district director and each internal revenue district established by law, pursuant to Title 26, United States Code, Section 7621, have been either eliminated completely, abolished in the year 2000, or never existed as a matter of law, in violation of Title 4, United States Code, Section 72?
2. Whether the Commissioner of Internal Revenue has delegation of authority, outside the District of Columbia, to issue or cause to be issued, a notice of levy in the absence of internal revenue districts, district director offices, and proper delegation, among the several States?
3. Whether Fred Rice is a delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury with redelegated authority from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to act anywhere within the State of Oklahoma since at least the year 2000?
4. Does the definition of “penalty” pursuant to Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502(14)(1995) include amounts sought under Title 26, United States Code, Sections 6651(a)(1), 6651(a)(3), 6654(a) and 6601(a)?
A. All penalties labeled as such should be included within meaning of penalty at Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502 and 3512.
B. Interest under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6601 should be held as a penalty in compensating for damages under both Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502 “penalty” and 3512’s public protection.
5. Does Title 26, United States Code, Section 6330©(2)( 😎 withstand the “public protection” provided by Congress pursuant to Title 44, United States Code, Section 3512, involving the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue’s claims of additional penalties and interest pursuant to §§ 6651(a)(1), 6651(a)(3), 6654(a) and 6601(a) inexorably linked to the request for information Form 1040?
Many of you have supported me at one time or another and you can truly say that in regard to those issues in my defense you have been a blessing beyond measure. Any success I have is equally your success. To the extent I speak on behalf of any part of my country I salute you. You are the best. Your help remains needed. When and if you decide to continue your support of me I would appreciate either one of two methods. I can receive support at paypal through gnutella@mindspring.com or I also can receive support at 5147 S. Harvard, # 116, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74135.
PS: For those of you wondering why I am not more charismatic in my solicitation of support is that I continue to believe you should support what you are led to support and not to support something because of the artful way it was presented to you. It is what it is and I do the best I can with it.
-
Brian,
Thanks for sharing your experiences educating the public about the unlawful nature of most of what present “government” does and pointing them to a place where they can here “the rest of the story”.
Its important to maintain a positive attitude and focus on change and education, instead of complaining or blaming. That is our only hope.
Keep up the good work.
-
Lindsey Springer here and offering you an update to certain events in my defense endeavors.
First, I wish to say thank you for your continued support as I must tell you I could not continue without your help. When the Court rules about the impact the elimination of the internal revenue district and district director have in my defense you can honestly say that without your help I could not have defended myself in that regard. It takes a team effort and again, thank you.
On January 25, 2010, the Supreme Court of the United States docketed my Petition for Writ of Mandamus:
http://origin.www.su…ket/09-8701.htm This Petition was actually recieved on January 11, 2010 by the Court but they lost it and then found it on January 21, 2010.
In this Petition for Writ of Mandamus I raised 3 primary issues with 4 subparts to the first issue:
Quote:I. Has Chief Circuit Judge in Misc. # 23 and the Panel in 09-5165, so far departed from Title 28, United States Code, Section 292(b), including the sanctioning of such departure by a lower district court, calling for an exercise of this Court's supervisory power pursuant to S.Ct. Rule 10(a) to render such exercise clear abuse of such limited power extended by Section 292(b)?
A. Does Title 28, United States Code, Section 292(b) authorize a Chief Judge of a circuit, to designate United States' Judicial District Court Judges commissioned in one “Oklahoma” judicial district, to 1 year terms in the other two “Oklahoma” judicial districts on a renewable yearly basis for no reason?
B. What is the limitation on the meaning of the term “temporarily” and phrase “public interest” in Title 28, United States Code, Section 292(b)?
C. Does Misc. # 23 qualify as a lawful and legal Article III designation pursuant to Title 28, Section 292(b) of Stephen P. Friot to 09-cr-043?
D. Should all orders entered by Stephen P. Friot in 09-cr-043 outside Stephen P. Friot's Western Judicial District Court commission be rendered coram non judice and invalid?
II. When the Secretary abolishes “internal revenue districts,” by calender year 2000 encompassing the State of Oklahoma, what original, territorial, and subject matter jurisdiction does a District Court Judge have over alleged “internal revenue law” offenses pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3231?
III. Is a United States Judicial District under Title 28, United States Code, Section 116(a) a valid substitute for an “internal revenue district” required for administration and enforcement of the “internal revenue laws” pursuant to Title 26, United States Code, Section 7621 in the State of Oklahoma?
If you wish to see a copy of the actual Petition email me and I will forward a copy of it to you. The Appendices I cannot forward (only in paper) but they are listed in the Table of Contents.
Today, I Petitioned the Supreme Court for a Writ of Certiorari regarding the Paperwork Reduction Act decision by the Tenth Circuit on August 31, 2009. Since I petitioned for a Petition for Rehearing I had 90 days from October 27, 2009 which is today. I made it but barely.
In that Petition, I challenged the published decision which held that failure to pay penalty under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6651(a)(3) was not a penalty subject to the protection of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 and 1995's public protection provision. That provision is Title 44, United States Code, Section 3512 [penalty defined at 3502(14)(1995)] The Panel in that case held that interest was not a penalty also.
There are two basic issues I have raised to the Supreme Court in that case with 2 subparts to one of the two main issues. First:
Quote:4. Does the definition of “penalty” pursuant to Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502(14)(1995) include amounts sought under Title 26, United States Code, Sections 6651(a)(1), 6651(a)(3), 6654(a) and 6601(a)?
A. All penalties labeled as such should be included within meaning of penalty at Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502 and 3512.
B. Interest under Title 26, United States Code, Section 6601 should be held as a penalty in compensating for damages under both Title 44, United States Code, Section 3502 “penalty” and 3512's public protection.
5. Does Title 26, United States Code, Section 6330©(2)(:cool: withstand the “public protection” provided by Congress pursuant to Title 44, United States Code, Section 3512, involving the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue's claims of additional penalties and interest pursuant to §§ 6651(a)(1), 6651(a)(3), 6654(a) and 6601(a) inexorably linked to the request for information Form 1040?
I also raised 3 jurisdictional challenges for good measure because they were inexorably linked to the Tenth Circuit's published decision. Those were:
Quote:1. What is the consequence to the “jurisdiction” of the Secretary of the Treasury and Commissioner of the Internal Revenue's claims of statutory additions, penalty or interest, exercised outside the District of Columbia, when the office of district director and each internal revenue district established by law, pursuant to Title 26, United States Code, Section 7621, have been either eliminated completely, abolished in the year 2000, or never existed as a matter of law, in violation of Title 4, United States Code, Section 72?
2. Whether the Commissioner of Internal Revenue has delegation of authority, outside the District of Columbia, to issue or cause to be issued, a notice of levy in the absence of internal revenue districts, district director offices, and proper delegation, among the several States?
3. Whether Fred Rice is a delegate of the Secretary of the Treasury with redelegated authority from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to act anywhere within the State of Oklahoma since at least the year 2000?
As you can see I have been rather busy. I intend to get relief from the Court. I realize it is difficult to understand for some. Again, this Petition is available for anyone who requests it. Just email me.
I have also filed a series of Motions and Replies in the criminal case brought against me in March of 2009. Those motions include:
(1) Motion to Dismiss for lack of standing to bring charges against me by the United States of America.
In this Motion and Memorandum, I show how without internal revenue district and district director encompassing or surrounding the State of Oklahoma, there is no authority of the Secretary present and that such authority has not been present since 2000 when the Secretary abolished internal revenue districts and district directors.
This leads to a LACK OF ARTICLE III STANDING OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA to be a party in the case they brought against me.
I next claim that such lack of standing leads also to a LACK OF ARTICLE III CASE OR CONTROVERSY at issue between me and the United States of America.
And finally, in this Motion, I claim dismissal appropriate because there is no United States Attorney in the “judicial district” since at least June 28, 2009 and that Title 28, United States Code, Section 547 places exclusive authority to prosecute “offenses against the laws of the United States” in the hands of the United States Attorney “appointed” under Title 28, United States Code, Section 541 by the President of the United States of America.
(2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Article III Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Lack of Article III Jurisdiction of the Facts, and Article III venue.
I split this up into two separate Motions. The first covers Count One and the second covers Counts Two through Six.
In this Motion and Memorandum, I show how the district court must have Article III subject matter jurisdiction and that only exists if some words in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, provides the subject. The only two available are the case involves a law of the United States or the United States is a party. I argue in order for the United States to be a party they must identify their interest in the outcome of application or enforcement of the internal revenue laws. Without such an interest in the State of Oklahoma, the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. It is more intense than that but the gist of my claim for dismissal on that score is just that.
Without the first issue resolved in favor of the other United States of America party there certainly is no Article III jurisdiction of the facts or venue.
In summary, my defense is that no power by law exists to allow exercise of the Secretary's authority outside the District of Columbia pursuant to Title 4, United States Code, Section 72, at least without internal revenue districts and district directors, previously established by law and presently in existence.
Also, the Acting United States Attorney was not appointed by the President nor by any other lawful means and thus no authority to prosecute in this judicial district exists as a matter of law.
Furthermore, the Honorable Stephen P. Friot was without any lawful authority to preside over the case brought by the Department of Justice in the northern judicial district as his commission was in the western judicial district. I have also moved to recuse on other grounds for bias and prejudice.
Without district director office over the State of Oklahoma and where I live there would be no delegated authority for anyone legally to act on behalf of the Secretary regarding my monetary events since at least 2000.
Again, if you wish for any copies of these defense submissions email me and I can forward them to you.
I have not heard from Tax Court on my motion to restrain nor have I heard from the northern judicial district where I move to enjoin the Secretary of the Treasury from acting outside the District of Columbia. Interestingly, the Department of Justice simply argued without declaration that the “IRS” was authorized to act as the Secretary. Such argument caused me to raise the question who is the IRS as a delegate and I cannot find any such delegation issued by the Secretary. I did find district director.
Lastly, in the Tenth Circuit, in 09-5088 where the Bivens Defendants (case over theft of $ 2000 while unauthorized raid was taking place in 2005 in my home) are arguing they did steal money when it benefits them but when it hurts them they resort back to arguing they never stole the money. I filed a Motion for Sanctions and they responded. I will reply. When I file that reply I will let you know what I am saying.
The Defendants said that they cannot be sanctioned in that case because they are the United States and they have never been sanctioned before by any Court. I thought you would like that one. I did since the mere name Bivens means sued individually and not in an official capacity.
I realize there is much said and I hope you can see what I am saying and what I am doing. I continue to need your help. I cannot do what I am doing without you.
If you wish to support me there are two ways that can be accomplished. The first is through paypal and either gnutella@mindspring.com or The conventional way remains to Lindsey Springer at 5147 S. Harvard, # 116, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74135.
Again, let me know if there is any of these defense documents you wish to obtain.
January 25, 2010.